Minutes - Environmental Policy Board - 10/16/2017

Home

City Planner Anderson replied that is simply the property boundary. He noted that part what they would look at is the density of the two developments, noting that the density ranges would be fairly close to one another. He noted that although Riverstone was approved as a PUD, it follows 3-7 units per acre with an overall density compliant with the R-2 standard. He stated that the density for this parcel would be similar and therefore if the density ranges fall within the same range, transitioning is not typically an element. He noted that if the density falls outside of the 3-7 units per acre range, the property would be required to have a transitioning element. Councilmember LeTourneau stated that it would then make sense that transitioning be brought forward so that the developer is aware. Board Member Hiatt stated that it would be to the advantage to the developer so that the two developers could work together to make the products cohesive, which would benefit both properties. City Planner Anderson stated that overall it seems that there is consensus that where appropriate for all requests incorporation of native landscaping and/or pollinator friendly plantings should be encouraged, use of a rain garden(s) should be suggested, and if possible, the reuse of stormwater ponds for irrigation should be suggested. He stated that specific to this request there seems to be consensus to encourage native landscaping near the ponds, the suggestions for the passive park, and near the eastern border the density of the adjacent projects should be reviewed and the use of transitioning should be encouraged if applicable. Board Member Anderson stated that she Googled passive park/recreation area and read aloud the definition. Chairperson Stodola stated that he lives in townhomes on Sunfish and there is an area that he would envision as passive, which is a minimum maintenance area that is mowed to provide greenspace between the adjacent developments. City Planner Anderson noted that the zoning code requires greenspace in the development for density in this range. Board Member Hiatt stated that there is a golf course neighboring this property. He stated that the pond location is a barrier to the golf course but noted that additional plantings could be used to provide a larger barrier. He stated that the ponds would provide the view of the golf course without the golf balls. Board Member Covart stated that there appears to be trails throughout this development and asked if those would connect to other trails in the area. City Planner Anderson stated that staff is presuming that the development would have privately maintained trails. He stated that there will be sidewalk in the development that would connect to Alpine in two locations and staff would work to adjust one or both access points for the development, for visual safety purposes and alignment with the road to the north. Environmental Policy Board / October 16, 2017 Page 4 of 9